UK Theft Act 1968

[@Art_performance]

Wonderful teacher❤

[@Ifyshalom1]

this is gold! thank you.

[@tomaszkarpinski5767]

First class explanation!

[@checkmatepublishing]

Thanks Tomasz!

[@ozyyi175]

Hi do you have multiple choice questions based on theft act 1968??

[@flyhigh9944]

Hey is all of this still relevant in 2020? Is any of it obsolete??

[@checkmatepublishing]

All still relevant :-) You'll find more on our website at www.checkmatepublishing.info

[@flyhigh9944]

Ty you have helped me greatly 👍

[@jaytealstone1687]

Good video but spelt actus reus wrong lol

[@flyhigh9944]

Jay Tealstone would you know if any of this is obsolete now?

[@jaytealstone1687]

@@flyhigh9944 Hi flyhigh. I've looked over the video for you and: OBSOLETE (sort of): - Regarding the Ghosh test from R v Ghosh, the Subjective part of the test is no longer required to prove by the prosecution. The Supreme Court decided that it did not accurately represent the law - Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67. The Objective part of the Ghosh test, however, is still very much relevant. ADDITIONAL RANDOM INFO: - Regarding taking property to make up for a debt, there is a little bit of wiggle room for how much the taken property is worth before it becomes dishonest. For example, if there is a debt of £100, and the defendant takes property worth £105 for the debt, it's still not dishonest. However, if the property taken was £500 for example, the Courts would not accept it, and it would be found to be dishonest. - Weirdly specific, but if a neighbour has a tree which has a branch coming over your fence and into your property, you can remove the branch up to where your property ends, as long as you give it back to the neighbour. Usually though branches can't be removed if you don't own the tree. - In a shop for example, the moment you pick up an item off the shelf, you have appropriated that property.

[@captainheinie6355]

This is Admiralty law not common law.